Are we Seriously Still Stumping to Bomb Assad Even With Apparent Evidentiary Contradiction?

Even with a clear 70% of Americans polled saying they don't want the US involved in the Syrian civil war - even to stifle alleged chemical weapons usage by the Assad Regime, President Obama and his entourage of faithful servants are pressing on anyway.

One of the few truly staunch allies we have, Great Britain voted to stay away from the controversial subject in its entirety giving David Cameron a tough job; telling Obama he was going to have to follow the will of the British Parliament.

Maybe President Obama should take a lesson from his contemporary in merry ole' England.

As you look at this try to consider the motivations for such an attack. For Assad, there isn't one. The Regime has clearly made substantial gains in their effort to crush the rebellion. In addition, President Obama and the world, really, have made it clear that the introduction of chemical weapons would be a game changer and not one that would favor Assad or his Regime.

On the other hand, the Rebels have everything to gain from any evidence of chemical weaponry. It really doesn't matter whether the Regime, the Rebels or some third party agency is responsible, this Administration has made it clear for at least a year that they have wanted to arm the Rebels and would strongly favor a Regime change in Syria.

The Saudis, whom the AP story implicates, are largely Salafist (Sunni) and thus unnatural enemies of Assad who is Shiite and "stranger" in the larger Sunni population of Syria. Being as Iran favors Assad, Saudi Arabia's natural proclivity is to oppose him. Should he prevail against the rebellion and remain unchallenged by outside forces, the generous help offered by Iran and their ally, Russia, could by Saudi measure destabilize the region; a fact that is still not a good enough motivation for a US attack. The reality is, whether Sunni, Shiite, Salafist, Wahhabi, True Soldier or Apostate, any Islamic-centric nation in the region will remain unfriendly to the US and to Israel and until they pose an overt and existential threat to the US, we have no horse in the Syrian's unseemly race.

The absence of National Security issues aside, the problem for the White House is its lack of proof, or at least a persuasive argument in the light of conflicting reporting by the AP and scientific proof presented by Russia both of which place the blame for the chemical introduction of Sarin on the Syrian Rebel forces.

The AP report includes conversations with Rebels and family members both accepting blame for the release while castigating Saudi Intel agents they claim gave them the weapons without actually telling them what they were or how to employ them. In fact, the Rebels told the AP reporter that the release was accidental.

In the Russian report, Scientists gutted the Administration's claims by providing information about the nature of the delivery system as well as the explosive - neither of which, they said, were elements commonly found in the kinds of chemical weapons found in the Syrian arsenal. They followed up by stating that those elements were typical in the kinds of weapons used by the Rebels.

If you will recall, the UN Inspectors had originally entered Syria to follow up on allegations that the Rebels had in fact fired chemical weapons in the first place. And we should keep in mind that they dismissed the allegations having only been on the ground for many hours and then cast their own allegations against the Assad Regime - without ever having reached the site of the attack to collect samples.

We should also keep in mind that the Rebel forces in Syria are largely infiltrated by and in some cases led by, Al Qaida operatives as the Rebel forces in Libya were during their civil war.

You know; Al Qaida. The same Al Qaida we have been fighting for the past 14 years and who everyone in DC blamed for the attacks on the World Trade Towers and the Pentagon.

That fact alone should give every red-blooded American pause. Do we really want to sidle up to the very people who launched a bloody assault on American citizens, on US soil and who are partly responsible for the deaths of several thousand American Service Members and Allied and NATO members these past 14 years?

For those who don't see any particular conflict with this; fighting them in one theater while arming them in another, take a closer look at this Al Qaida saturated rebel force and their sense of fair play on the battlefield. If anyone can still justify supporting these cretins in any way; materially, financially, morally or militarily, there probably isn't anything that will dissuade you.

Speaking of troubling, the vociferous and theatrical spewings of John Kerry would cause Shakespeare to convulse. The fact that he is supporting a strike on Assad should cause all Americans to question the validity of the Administration's claims. Let's face it, Kerry has not exactly been consistent throughout his years in the public arena. His own Service time has been marred by claims made by hundreds of his fellow Service members whose collective memories of his service time differs greatly from what Kerry has told us. In the years following his release from Active Service, Kerry was a clear detractor of our involvement in Vietnam. Decades later, he challenged George W. Bush on Iraq using the some of the very arguments we are using to challenge him on Syria, today.

Based on his retorts, Kerry doesn't like being challenged.

John McCain's little faux pas with an Iphone during hearings this week didn't draw much more than a wink and a bit of pleasant joking from either the mainstream media personalities or, sadly, McCain himself. Considering it is McCain who is campaigning to send America's Sons and Daughters into the midst of a civil war, raging in another Islamic nation with still no discernible plan, makes his dismissive attitude that much more disgusting! I can tell you if a Staff Non Commissioned Officer or even a Private acted this way during an operational briefing, the flame protruding from the rear area of their trousers would be burning brightly weeks after the application of Non Judicial Punishment and healthy dose of attention getting additional duty.

As is so typical with this Administration, there are far too many questions unanswered and far too many entangled entities to be able to declare so definitively that the Assad Regime which had the most to lose in this, is guilty.

And if this is truly that complicated, how is it that this President, his Administration and apparently a growing fan base in Congress is so convinced that striking out at anyone, at this stage will provide the "encouragement" the strike is intended to provide?

And if they are wrong, how does this not give impetus for the Assad Regime, Iran and even Russia to retaliate in some fundamental way against US forces in the region, and Israel.

And is the American population going to stand for one more blunder by an Administration that is defined by incompetence in Foreign Policy?

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

 

Does the; "The World will be Better Without Him…" Argument Still Work as We Approach the Hour of Inevitable Intervention in Syria?

Incredible! Even as United States Marines, Sailors, Soldiers, Airmen and Coastguardsmen continue to be sacrificed in Afghanistan for a failed understanding of that culture, we are speeding toward the likelihood of doing the same in Syria.

Yes; the Administration has repeated the mantra; 'no boots on the ground' until I can hardly sleep without hearing it, but, that was also what was supposed to give us peace of mind as we intervened in Libya.

Remember Libya?

We were chided by the "save the world folks" that the Rebels in Libya simply wanted "peace" and "freedom" even though we knew they were littered with Al Qaida operatives.

Libya.

It is approaching one year ago that the CIA black house in Benghazi was hit - by Libyan rebel elements whom, we were told, would be grateful for our intervention or at least, that was the premise.

Four dead Americans later and not one single question answered, and this nation herds its way toward yet one more intervention in yet one more fundamentalist Islamic culture sans any evidence that we have learned a thing about the driving force in all of these cultures; the religion!

And make no mistake about it; the religion is key!

If you are a person who thinks religion doesn't matter, then you are a person not given to a religion or who has lost understanding of your own. Our God(s) instruct us, direct us, compel us. We are given to their admonishments and exhortations, led by their Pastors, Teachers, Rabbis, Clerics, Imams, Leaders and we willingly conform to the image of the one God we claim to serve.

If the God of that religion teaches compassion, we will strive to be compassionate. If that God displays anger and violence or even instructs his followers to propagate by the sword, we are very likely to comply.

Choosing to ignore a person's religion or his adherence to it is both insulting to him and foolish. A man given to his God is someone whose character and walk is disciplined by his teaching and compelled to act on his commands. It is both an act of faith and a sense of responsibility. It is internal, external, eternal and all encompassing. Even when that person seems not to exude the nature of his God or to be living the perceived teachings of his religion, he is never-the-less, personally hounded by the knowledge that he has fallen short and is content to change even the midst of "moral" failure.

So how is it that the 'best and brightest' in our government can't seem to comprehend this? Why would military strategists intentionally ignore so vital a piece of information about the enemy they are about to face? When in history have men ever purposefully suppressed information about a man's religious proclivities? And most important; why would the citizens of, arguably, the strongest nation in the world not demand that its elected leadership do a better job of assessing its enemies before embarking on an adventure that will surely lead to the shedding of the blood of its Sons and Daughters?

The answer is simple; the people have become lax and far too many no longer hold to any principles steeped in the teachings of the God of their Fathers. We are a people without a compass and sadly, without an historical perspective of our current enemies. Many in this nation carry with them a sense of compassion but compassion by itself can be a deadly and foolishly applied emotion if not followed up by "personal" action. If a person feels so compassionately about something, they should feel compelled to act accordingly - and personally! If you truly believe intervention on the part of the "innocents" in Syria is of paramount importance, then prove it; mount an aircraft bound for the Turkish/Syrian border and help, don't demand that this government send in War Fighters whose religion is denied them and who have been denied the right of self-defense. If you feel morally bound to help those "innocents"; then go if you are so convinced.

My point; there has been a growing concern about Syria and the "innocents" there without a corresponding understanding of the government, the makeup and belief of the rebel forces or even the "innocent civilians" our actions are purported to help.

Do we actually "know" who the bad guy is in this fight? How is it we can be so certain that the "good guys", are good; measured by their perception of us and their future plans, based on their religious convictions about interpersonal, interfaith and international relations? Even as the "innocents" who have been rushing toward the Turkish border were pleading for our help, they were also defiantly clear, 'don't send in your troops'. There were also embedded threats that inaction would likely turn the "good guys" into bad guys.

So how good is good, if it can so easily be turned into bad? Isn't this beginning to sound, just a little, like Libya 2.0?

The only supportive evidence that Chemicals were used has been in the form of Administration commentary ending with "trust me". Keep in mind that the UN, at least initially, was responding to accusations that the Rebels had used these weapons. One day later, without any definitive evidence and having not reached the site of the attack, the UN had predictably changed its tune and lodged accusations of their own against the Regime. As of this writing, there still isn't any hard evidence of a chemical, or which chemical or the delivery method or even the culprit.

And yet, there remains a strong and steady voice to intervene, militarily; a voice that says; "send them - not me". And even if the Administration's tarot cards are correct, the truth is we cannot know what the unintended consequences will be once we unleash one or many Cruise Missiles into another sovereign and fundamentalist Islamic land; keeping in mind that the internal strife in Syria is not a clear and present danger to the US….And knowing we possess not the will to fight definitively!

For as we now know by gleaning our recent history, in Libya, our War Fighters can wind up paying a price for our willful blindness of the more egregious doctrines of a religion we have so vehemently scrubbed from our assessments of this enemy.

So, should we feel compassion when women and children and the aged suffer during combat? The answer is, yes. But that is not the question to be asked in this instance. Rather the question is whether our compassion should lead to unstudied, unshackled, historically voided aggressive action against someone - anyone, in our knee-jerk attempt to stop ravages against an element of society we have deemed, innocent. For as we have seen in Afghanistan, parsing the good from the bad, the innocent from the guilty, those deserving of our compassion from those deserving of our wrath, is no easy task and far too often we get it wrong.

Until the time comes that we are ready to again come to terms with what we have always declared to be our religious heritage and until we decide to make proper and complete assessments of our enemies, we will continue to make decisions based neither in morality or historical fact and we will continue to flounder as a legitimate military force in the world.

And our War Fighters will continue to pay the price for our arrogance, our ignorance and the selfish demands of people who do not possess the courage or tenacity to send themselves.

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

Why are the President and Members of Congress Giving Aid and Comfort to Known Enemies of the United States?

This is a good question and one that no one in the media seems willing to ask. Even Fox news seems ambivalent, rather skirting the issue in favor of more…"compassionate" questions.

We have known for a long time that Al Qaida has been an integral influence within the Syrian Rebel forces in much the same way they were, in Libya. If you will recall, the very same DC voices played down the likely effect of Al Qaida's particular virulent influence on the people of Libya and look how well that worked out.

Allegations of atrocities against non-combatants in Syria have been leveled against rebel forces and the sitting government alike and none any more horrifying than those committed against the Christian community in Homs and yet John McCain, Lindsey Graham, this President and a legion of followers remained silent about that. Only when it seemed plausible that Assad's regime might be complicit in bloody acts against the mainstream Muslim community there, have any of these fine upstanding "servants" bothered to show concern.

When they drew the "red line" at the use of chemical weapons, it seems they began to work overtime to insure some evidence could be found. Even before trusted agents of the UN determined that some small amount of chemical (possibly Sarin), was used against the "innocents" in Syria, the administration was busy elevating the rhetoric and the effort to "educate" the American population about the horrors of the Assad regime and heartbreaking "fight for freedom" of the brave rebel forces.

What is really irksome, is that we have been hearing this same mantra for years now and in every single case, the Administration has been proven wrong in all of their estimates of who have been populating these rebellions and what their core desires were.

In Egypt, we were virtually guaranteed that the people simply wanted to rid themselves of a barbaric Mubarak regime which had oppressed its people for decades; that they simply wanted Democracy. We were also all but guaranteed that the Muslim Brotherhood was not a political entity and did not have political aspirations. When the MB fielded its candidate, we were then told the people would never get behind a fundamentalist candidate, much less an MB agent and that the society in Egypt was really much more secular.

All these months later and what has grown out of that particular misjudgment or Administration deception, is a Morsi Presidency, with the real face of the MB exposed and clearly a population which leans far more to the fundamentals of its insidious state religion, than we were told. The Copt community has suffered at least as much since, as before with almost no discernible concern from either the Administration or the likes of McCain, Graham and their like-minded counterparts in Congress.

We were also guaranteed that Al Qaida's influence on the rebel factions in Libya was minimal and that those fine folks simply wanted Democracy. To date; that new "government" has proven to be impotent. Let's recall that US Embassy security was supplied by the little known, Blue Mountain Group, a British firm who, essentially, subcontracted to a Libyan Security firm, manned largely by former Libyan Rebels who were, infiltrated by Al Qaida and who were carrying weapons without ammunition per US mandate!

Are you feeling better or worse about our prospects in Syria?

From Tunisia, to Algeria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Egypt, the one common denominator has been this Administration's astounding ability to get it wrong, every single time. Why is anyone under the impression that they have it right this time?

Why is there anyone left, given the endless bloodletting by all sides in every one of these internal disasters, with any hope that the Obama administration or McCain, Graham, Congress or any element in any one of these poor excuses for elections can possibly get it right?

Why isn't Congress asking the right questions about Benghazi? Why are they so easily distracted, almost hopefully so, from the single investigation that could bring it all crashing down?

The reason is because if they clarify the why, it will ultimately lead to questions about this Administration's understanding of the enemy and his religion. This will then logically lead to questions about the true motivations for defending the indefensible, and so willingly casting the lives of America's Forces so callously into harm's way.

Benghazi is the lynch pin in this Administration's perverted wagon train of deception and following ill-conceived battle strategy; take out Benghazi and every single related foreign policy venture becomes questionable.

Could it actually be that Smedley D. Butler was correct in his summation of the motivation for war? Could it really be that simplistic - and evil that it is far more profitable to stay at war, than to end it, with ferocity and determination?

Could it be that this President is so emotionally compromised, having been abandoned by both Fathers that he has been left to seek solace in the only vestige of paternal memory he has left; Islam? Could this be why he is so determined to convince us that our eyes and ears cannot be trusted; that the atrocities and endless ravages against Western society by Islamic forces are mere aberrations in the midst of an otherwise stable, loving, peaceful ideology?

Could it be the convergence of the very worst of two polluted motivations; the mentally ill and the morally corrupt?

What is certain is while there is very little evidence that Congress is going to get this right. I firmly believe they are as morally compromised as this President is mentally and emotionally challenged by his experiences growing up in a broken home.

There is zero justification for having abandoned Americans under siege in the wasteland known as Libya. There is not one single bright spot in this debacle that isn't centered on the selfless and heroic acts of two Navy SEALs. Literally everyone else in this story is tainted in one fashion or another and because those who have so willingly compromised their names, their souls, and American security, they have left the door open for yet one more grave mistake, in Syria.

We know the Rebels in Syria are littered with Al Qaida agents. We have known this for months. We know Al Qaida and their affiliates, hate the United States and our Western Allies. Abandoning them to their fate - wherever that might be seems the most logical choice; supporting them with arms is both counterintuitive and even treasonous.

For those who have not grappled with this next question, let me help you; the United States of America is a unique culture. We are not the world's fighting force we are not obligated to secure life and liberty for the blood-lusting cultures of the world. Whether Syria's present government stands or falls, is of little security concern for the United States right now. What is certain is that Al Qaida and it's agents are a clear and present danger to the United States and our holdings.

Supporting them has not proven to be a sound decision; supporting them in Syria makes even less sense.

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

Benghazi, Agency Scandals and Syria; The Most Perverted Shell Game Yet.

The stories of government agency corruption and the blurring of Constitutional guidelines has certainly caused a storm of consternation and outright anger in the past many weeks. It seems each day has provided us with yet one more glimpse into the seedy world of a government which has clearly lost its way, and shed even the appearance of concern for maintaining the public trust.

While the debacle in Benghazi had dominated the national media stage for a few months, it was quickly shifted to the back burner to make room for far more salacious tales starring State Department appointees and prostitution as well as a litany of stories detailing every manner of corrupt behavior.

Learning that the IRS abused its power and deliberately targeted groups with a very specific political leaning was just one more.  Certainly the American public has a right to be concerned when the single most powerful agency in government, shamelessly exerts its influence and authority against the very Americans it collects money from in order to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States".

It was as disconcerting to learn that the Department of Justice was gleaning Associated Press documents for who knows what purpose, as it was ironic that the media which has acted as a pro-bono ad agency for this Administration and its agencies, should take issue with this particular infringement on our Constitutional "Rights".

The NSA digital surveillance program really isn't news except to those who haven't been concerned about it since the last time it was discussed some 6 or 7 years ago. The fact is, that program really hasn't changed, it just happened to come to light again but this time in the midst of a list of other abuses of authority and power, levied during this seemingly teflon coated administration's second term.

There is no doubt that all of these things give reason for concern. It does however remain to be seen which, if any, of these things will be deemed to be truly illegal if not arrogantly applied.

The real problem is, these things, while troubling have served a much darker purpose and it appears that purpose is now all but accomplished; Weapons to the Syrian Rebels.

It seems just a little too convenient that all of these "scandals" should appear on the scene right in the middle of Congressional hearings to determine exactly what happened in Benghazi. And being as Congress has yet to learn how to multi-task, they have been easily side-tracked from that most important investigation to these sideshows. What this has managed to do is take the spotlight from Benghazi and away from any suggestion of Administration guilt in order to focus on what may be determined to be not much more than poor judgment in some cases and horrible supervision in others.

Since September 11, 2012, Benghazi has been a mine filled with potential evidence of wrong-headed vision, Administration malfeasance, upper echelon military incompetence, Pentagon and Administration collusion, Administration protectionism and a list of bald face lies.

Let's look back at the events just days before, during, and following the attack by members of the Al Qaida splinter group, Ansar Al Sharia on the compound in Benghazi:

1. August 30, 2012 - Jamaa Islamiya, a State Department-designated terrorist group, called for an assembly at the US Embassy in Cairo to protest the ongoing imprisonment of its spiritual leader, Sheikh Omar abdel Rahman. This story was reported by USA Today, September 12th. If a reporting agency could find this information, it stands to reason intelligence agencies were already aware of it which means, the Embassy knew of it. If the Embassy knew of it, it also follows they willfully lied having released a statement which included language blaming the home-made video in California for instigating the protest. They, and the Administration continued to lie about the motivation for this protest and the attack in Benghazi - for weeks even though it was well established not to be an element of a protest about a you tube video which only had a few hundred hits by the day of the attack.

2. September 6, 2012 - The Libyan-flagged vessel, Al-Entisar laden with weapons, docked at the Turkish port of Iskanderun, bound for the Syrian Rebels. The only active question is whether or not the Administration tasked either the CIA or other US agencies with collecting these weapons with the intent of circumventing the desire of Congress, to arm the Syrian Rebels.

3. September 11, 2012 - It has been reported that Ambassador Stevens met with Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin just hours before the attack. One pertinent question is why a sitting US Ambassador to a very volatile Libya whose principle office is in Tripoli, risked driving thirteen hours through "indian country" to meet with a Turkish Emissary at what seems to have been a CIA black house?

4. September 25 2012 - President Obama speaks to the UN Council, in large part to recommend a resolution which would make any speech considered blasphemous to Islam or Islam's founder, Mohammed, illegal. It is important to know that President Obama had been collaborating with the OIC for some time prior to either the unrelated protest in Cairo or the attack in Benghazi. Diana West Provided some insight within hours of the session.

It is also important to recall that the President had already announced Al Qaida, essentially, irrelevant due to the effects of policies his Administration had operated under for nearly four years. Openly declaring that Ansar Al Sharia, a known Al Qaida affiliate had attacked the compound for reasons that would seem to suggest autonomy, unit cohesion, planning and commitment would cause this President and his Administration to look just a little foolish so close to an election.

Those Congressmen who have led the investigation into the events leading up to the attack and the abysmal failure of the Administration and high ranking military Officers to provide any kind of fire support or rescue operation during this entire seven hour fight seem to have become fixated on questions which would indicate the President and his cohorts acted as they did simply to buy time and win the election.

If this is the case, they are either incredibly narrow sighted, or politically motivated, themselves. The truth is, there was no single issue which motivated the Administration to act - or rather not act to defend the American personnel in Benghazi on 11 September 2012; there were several reasons not the least of which was a need to cover any suggestion of this Administration's attempts to funnel weapons to the Syrians without public scrutiny. Another reason was the need to protect the Administration's narrative about the disposition of Al Qaida.

There was one other reason, however, that has not received as much attention as it should and this may have carried as much weight as anything else; the need to build a pool of sympathy here in the United States for the Ummah and the support it would then lend President Obama's desire to see anti-blasphemy legislation enacted in the UN.

He has made his loyalties quite clear over these past years; Islam first, US security and the lives of War Fighters, second. And this is where a great disservice is being done to our Service Members right now.

For as we speak, there is every indication that this nation is poised to supply arms and munitions to the rebels in Syria, in spite of the fact they are associated with Al Qaida; in spite of the fact they have committed attrocities with religious zeal; in spite of the fact they are almost certainly responsible for the murder and disposition of the Christians in Homs and in spite of the fact the rebels are fundamentalists and doctrinally, no different than the sitting government.

The point being, there are no good guys, once again, in this fight. For once the smoke clears, whoever lands on top will hold within their hearts the very same animosity toward the US, the West and Israel, that the vanquished holds. Once again, President Obama has proven he either doesn't understand the fundamental influence of this religion on its followers or worse, he does and is acting to support them anyway. And what makes it even worse is that nearly every single sitting member in both chambers of Congress, are acting or, not acting, out of the same ignorance.

What these latest scandals have done, is to keep Congress, the Media and most of the Public focused on lesser things while allowing a true travesty, the debacle in Benghazi fall from view.

If Benghazi falls so far out of view that Congress and the people lose their desire to find out what truly happened, it will do nothing less than vindicate this sitting President's policies and his vision of Islam and neither of these will be good for our War Fighters.

As it seems almost certain that this country is poised to deliver weapons to a known enemy of the United States, it is also then highly likely that American troops will be asked to once again shed their blood on another sand swept, Islamic landscape working within the failed paradigm of Counter Insurgency doctrine and within the parameters of an ROE that continues to take American War Fighters lives.

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

On the topic of Guns, Accoutrements, and the idiots who "Represent" us:

I have had just about enough of the queue of lambasting idiots whose sole desire is to control every aspect of American's lives. Their bloated exhortations about things they obviously know nothing about has risen to the level of epidemic. What is more troublesome is that there seems to be an unending assortment and number of mixed nuts fully prepared to accept any edict these windbags hand down from their lofty "thrones" in the City of the Dead (DC) while the combined knowledge of both exhorter and audience, if melted down and strained couldn't fill a thimble!

 I am sick to the point of retching of listening to the absolute nonsensical sputtering about firearms by those who can't differentiate between a butt stock and a flash suppressor so here is a short lesson in nomenclature to make you sound less stupid:

 FIRST, they are not "clips", they are magazines and the semi-automatic AR-15 is not "an assault rifle" any more than a baseball bat, hammer, kitchen knife, scarf, rope, lead pipe, pipe wrench, automobile, hands, feet, stick, screw driver, torch, et al all of which have been used at one time or another to "assault" someone by a deranged person.

 The "shoulder thingy that goes up" is a folding butt stock on a very few long guns most notably, the SPAS shotgun which is no longer manufactured. The correct description of what this particular dingbat in Congress was trying to describe, is, an adjustable butt stock. Its crime is making itself available for shooters of varying shapes and sizes - including women for whom many rifles are too large to fire accurately and painlessly.

 A bayonet lug is a superfluous piece of equipment - for almost anyone, in or out of uniform and does not contribute to the mental deficiency that denies a person the ability to know it is wrong to kill. A sling swivel is a mounting point for a sling which is used in competition and to carry a rifle over the shoulder for most civilians and while there are some really neat 1, 2 and 3 point slings on the market, no one except a seasoned and well-trained professional has a need for it or would even know how to use it. And NO; it does not make the rifle more lethal or the operator more proficient.

 A flash suppressor is not a lethal device. It is used to reduce the light signature of escaping gases from the muzzle of the rifle so the enemy has a more difficult time registering your position and dropping mortars and artillery on your head. Being as there isn't much in the way of danger from ordinance here in the civilian world, it is superfluous. And just because it is superfluous is no reason to ban it. It does not make the rifle more lethal or the operator more proficient. It does, however, make the rifle compliant with long distance rifle matches hosted around the country and at Camp Perry every year.

 A pistol grip has sent many a "sensitive anti-gunner" into orbit. Here's the skinny: All things being equal, I prefer a straight stock. Contorting your hand and wrist to accommodate a pistol grip actually take some practice and again, does nothing to make the rifle more lethal or the operator more proficient. So, get over it!

A magazine with any number of rounds is of ZERO use to someone who is not well-trained with the rifle or handgun it supports and no; Newtown doesn't count because at the grand distance of about 25 feet, he could have caused as much damage with a pile of rocks.

Magazines hold cartridges - not bullets! The ammunition that the Military uses does not possess "magical properties" delivering greater lethality. The fact is, military grade ammunition is designed to meet the requirements of the Geneva Conventions which requires full metal jacket bullets to reduce expansion and associated lethality which in turn reduces damage to the flesh, increasing the probability of survival. This also, then makes this ammunition terrible for hunting. In comparison, a hunting bullet, fired from even a bolt action rifle is far more lethal.

 Finally; for all of you "sheeple" who mindlessly "feel" your way to decisions that could ultimately eliminate first the 2nd Amendment and eventually, the entire Bill of Rights; get your bloody heads out of the clouds and do a little research so you won't appear to be the blustering idiots you currently sound like. And if you insist on allowing others to represent your sorry opinions of something that is no more than a tool, in the hands of a law abiding citizen, at least get someone who doesn't make the rest of us feel embarrassed to be a member of the same species!

 If any of you, left of center would like legitimate questions answered…please feel free to ask them. And no; I will not get drawn into an inane conversation filled with semantics and sensationalism. The fact is, our murder rate isn't even half of what the United Kingdom's is even though there are no more firearms available to their "subjects". Currently the weapon of choice in "merry ole England" is a knife which Parliament is in the process of outlawing.

 In this country, last year, 323 people were killed by someone brandishing an AR-15 or AK-47 style, semi-automatic rifle while in that same year, nearly 700 people were killed by a hammer!

 Echo Eight Bravo; Out!

Is BengPetAllen…"Gate" related to Afghanistan? Its Closer than You May Think!

What a difference just a few days can make. Just a day or so before the election, the White House was still grappling with exactly how to categorize the coordinated attack by members of Ansar Al Shariah on the US compound in Benghazi. Apparently, the 52% of the voting block in the US who chose to keep the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave for another fun filled four years isn't concerned about that. In fact they are not apparently concerned with any of the inconsistencies in our foreign policy.

Yes, inconsistencies; policies that are inconsistent with the traditional and constitutional vision of US national security. If someone wants to try and convince me that wasting the precious blood of American War Fighters for the benefit of another people, in another land, who are taught from birth to hate the great western satan is either rational or patriotic; have at it! So what does this have to do with revelations of David Petraeus's extra-curricular activities?

Absolutely nothing! And that is the point!

Unfortunately, it took an attack on a small, unprotected compound in Libya which ended with the death of two Bureaucrats and two genuine, American Heroes, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods to cause the dead in DC to even consider that something might be wrong. Why? Simply because it hit close to home. No longer were those who were betrayed nameless, uniformed,  men and women from towns with obscure names. The two principals killed in the coordinated attack launched by Ansar Al Shariah on the anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Towers in New York City, September 11th, were, for all practical purposes, kin.

They were of the DC crowd and the DC crowd takes notice when their own are threatened.

But what the media - all the media, the vast majority of the DC crowd and most Americans seem to have missed is that the very same foreign policy vision that caused the attack in Benghazi, is that which has been killing American Service Members and ISAF forces in Afghanistan! But as with all things, the squeaky wheel gets the attention; and DC can be very squeaky when the carnage they have caused hits too close to home.

Precisely what the motivation for the attack in Benghazi was, we may never know. The reason we may never know is because there was something else, something sinister going on behind "the curtain". Theories abound but what we do know does more than simply suggest something untoward was underway in Libya. Whatever that thing is was deemed so important as to cause the White House, its entire administration and appointees to agree to leave Stevens, Smith, Doherty and Woods to die. The fact is, it was determined acceptable that all in that compound that night should be sacrificed rather than let whatever the secret is, come to light.

I say this with conviction because several calls for fire support were placed by those besieged in Benghazi that night. I say this because the White House watched the entire episode unfold - all 7 hours of it, from cameras mounted on UAV's which had been launched, presumably after the attack began, to "monitor" the attack.

Why hasn't the media asked these questions?

1. Where were those UAV's launched from? How is it that they were on site so early in the attack?

2. If someone had the wherewithal to launch UAV's - and use them for surveillance/monitoring, where was the same determination to defend Americans on sovereign US soil?

3. Why was AFRICOM, General Carter Ham, replaced within weeks of the attack? The story about his order to deliver supporting fire on the mortar which killed Doherty and Woods, only to be countermanded is said to be inaccurate. And yet, this curious timing of his replacement is supported with statements that only generate more questions. Keep in mind that most posts are three year assignments.

An authorized statement released to the press was that there was no way to know with certainty what was going on in the compound that night. It was even intimated that fear of collateral damage was a concern.

Sound familiar?

Really; a rogue element attacks sovereign US property and its Ambassador and we're worried about collateral damage??

Do you suppose this sitting President who watched from his "War Room" as Americans and his appointed Ambassador were being attacked would be as concerned about "collateral damage" if that kind of attack happened in DC? I think not; but again, that would be too close to home!

One of the theories being floated is that the administration had authorized the movement of arms to Syrian Rebels (without Congressional approval), being shipped first to Turkey. In fact we know that Stevens met with a Turkish emissary just a couple of hours before the attack.

Does it strike anyone as strange that an American Ambassador to Libya would leave the consulate in Tripoli, travel overland, some thirteen hours away, to meet with a Turkish emissary? What business could an American Ambassador to Libya possibly have with a Turkish emissary, anyway? Why not meet with him at the consulate? If it was legitimate Embassy business, again, why would he do that business some thirteen hours away in Benghazi, rather than in the US Embassy…in Tripoli?

Could the operative word here be "legitimate"?

This brings us to this latest round of stories involving two men entrusted with prosecuting the war in Afghanistan; men who hold the lives of America's Sons and Daughters in their hands. Men who have subverted better judgment, ignored history, zealously expunged vital information about the enemy from training curricula, who continue to force America's Sons and Daughters to patrol in streets known to be littered with IED's. These men, who force better men to forfeit their lives based on a confabulation projected by their CIC who is infatuated with all things Islam. Men who select controversial and historically disastrous strategy to force our War Fighters to operate under simply because their Commander in Chief has determined that Afghan lives are more valuable than the Sons and Daughters of American families are morally reprehensible! Just because something may be lawful by man's law does not mean it is so by God's law. Knowingly placing another man in jeopardy of losing his life or physical well-being when you have the knowledge and the ability to prevent it, is a crime whether or not our morally challenged bureaucrats consider it so or not!

David Petraeus has been caught in the act of Adultery. I know of enlisted Marines who have been charged with adultery, tried by Courts Martial and kicked out of the Marine Corps with an Undesirable Discharge for being involved in the very same thing David Petraeus is allegedly guilty of.

I am not here to pass judgment on David Petraeus or General Allen (should those allegations prove to be true), for essentially a sin against God but to remind people that it is apparent that these acts were committed at the same time men were being slaughtered by "friendlies", being forced to operate within the untenable guidelines of COIN - a strategy Petraeus selected and Allen rubber stamped.

And now, the White House is allowing the moral failure of at least one man to distract Congress and the American people from the greater travesty which is this government's complete failure to give fire support to Americans who were under siege and who this President watched die!

There is nothing that can be uttered that can justify this conscious decision to not use the might of this nation to defend the lives of Americans - ever! It is clear that this President and his appointees have deemed "some thing" of far greater value in an environment where there was nothing of national security concern that would dictate that. There were no legitimate national security secrets that needed to be protected, which is made obvious by the unusual absence of an MSG (Marine Security Guard) detail.

No, there is nothing that will ever justify the inaction of our "leadership", that night. But there was consistency in at least one area: The narrative was protected "at-all-cost". The inexplicable and costly determination to protect the Ummah at all cost remained intact. Once again, this sitting President and his entire entourage proved their willingness to cause American deaths rather than chance a stray round that might injure or kill "an innocent".

King David had an affair with a woman and then ordered her husband, Uriah, be placed in harm's way to insure his death. David was guilty of adultery and then murder to cover it up. But unlike David who repented, President Obama remains obstinate and intent to continue covering his many sins against the very people he has sworn to defend.

Apparently, David Petraeus has learned more from his "liege" than David or David's God.

The American people made it clear that they want this kind of Presidency. But elections have consequences. The most costly consequence of this election is the continuation of policies which place men at undo risk, for an ungrateful people. We have high ranking Officers who sully their names, their uniforms, and bring pain to their families.

As a bonus, Congress unwittingly masks far greater sins by turning its focus on the personal sins of men and a single incident which shines a light on the greater problem. Unfortunately, they remain blinded to the reality of that greater problem.

And 52% of the American people remain blissfully unaware. Heck; they'll be getting free IUD's and government paid tuition.

Why torture yourself with troubling things…

SF

jb

More Proof of the Fruit of COIN Madness!

This is another important piece chronicling the perverse nature of an ill-advised battle strategy chosen by a mindless body politic and their morally defunct General Grade surrogates.

If the strategy (COIN) was such a magnificent contrivance, there would be no discussion about progress; it would in fact be self-evident. Instead we have journalists like Michael Yon, who is not of the exact same camp as I am. He and I have talked and he has held out hope for a properly run COIN operation even in the midst of the demonically possessed while I believe every iteration is doomed to failure.

This, his latest piece, provides even more insight into this nightmare called COIN, conceived in the hearts of spiritually soiled men and in meetings governed by a coward's concern for global perceptions! This travesty of strategy, as a principle of theater-wide application ought to be outlawed by this Nation!

The world court opinion BE DAMNED!

Our concern as a people of a nation should be for the well-being of our War Fighters - FIRST! If Afghans, Iraqis, Iranians, Syrians, Libyans, Tunisians, Algerians, et al want to lessen their plight, they have the exact same opportunity as our Fore Fathers did; fight for it! We owe them nothing and certainly not our trust or the blood of our finest! The problem is, they don't see their condition as a scourge or a plight; they see it as the spiritually enlightened condition of men who have given themselves to the doctrines of a man who claimed to have conversed with a 'god'. Any man in this country who thinks we have anything to offer people who have given so much of themselves to so vile a religious construct as Islam is simply arrogant - and ignorant! Asking better men to sacrifice themselves for this arrogance is the height, width and depth of moral depravity! Demanding they continue in light of such absolute proof of the total and abysmal failure of such an arrogantly conceived battle plan, is simply criminal!

If this is going to change, men currently serving in the Halls of our great governmental institutions are going to have to enlist the help of men dedicated to this discussion who actually understand the topic. Our Representatives and Senators are going to have to decide to act in a way that may not be politically feasible and say things that may cost them an election. But one thing is certain, unless these men who claim to have a heart for the troops and say they understand that the current direction is wrong, act furiously to change it, our forces will continue to suffer the same life-altering injury and pay with their lives as have those before them. And the price they will pay, in the end, will be in vain because Afghans are not going to change what they fervently believe to be the state of being required by their 'god' and his spokesman.

Afghanistan is a cesspool of humanity; a mass grave for honorable men compelled to serve in her sewage by the arrogant, delusional and cowardly politicians of the day. Nothing good has come of our efforts; nothing good will come out of the next two years.

Our political establishment has lost its way or maybe the American population has lost its moral compass and have consciously chosen men of unscrupulous character and such a deplorable lack of courage to represent them. In either case the affect is the same on our War Fighters.

Michael Yon does an exceptional job of providing insight into the latter days of this our most miserable martial effort in the midst of a demonically charged and hate-filled culture.

How many more lives must be destroyed before those who dare call themselves "Statesmen", will muster the courage to draw that metaphoric line in the sand and demand this fratricide committed by our leaders against our War Fighters, end?

Happy Reading…

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/stuck-in-the-mud.htm

SF

John Bernard